anothergol

Also used to be a purist, and not anymore. Seems like a natural evolution to me. However, Cobi is the brand that I'm not using anything from. I LOVE their unique parts, but sadly their colors are in no way compatible with LEGO's. And there's obviously no Bricklink for Cobi. And Cobi while does sell parts, they seem to be even more expensive than LEGO's. So how do you manage with non-matching colors? Especially in SW that's full of light grey, and Cobi's grey is way too different. Also btw, Flicker's LEGO groups, and obviously Instagram, are pretty open to "LEGO but not LEGO". My MOCs there have been mixed brands since 2022. Here, it depends who you talk to. Personally, I'm here for the "bricks system" and not for a company (that has been really pissing me off recently, but more on this later). And let's remember that we don't even owe the brick to LEGO. Some brands have even been preserving the bricks system better than LEGO has. Like, good old hinges, or motor system, that LEGO has completely ditched.

I got some early Still good to finally have wedge tiles as Lego, as those will most likely have tile lips (the non-Lego ones are wedge plates without studs). But it's gonna take years until they cover all wedge lengths in all colors.

They almost all already exist, so I doubt it. Except for the corner cheese slopes, which do already exist, but in a (better looking) rounded form, so here it would make sense for Lego do make their own. (1x3 cheese slopes also don't exist, well I've never seen any yet) And the crate's joints seem dated, like joints that Lego has moved away from a long time ago. So I have doubts about all this. Would be great to finally have them as Lego, though. And it would be quite ironic. I'm currently fighting with the customs & "Lego representant" because my last 4 non-Lego sets have been seized for IP infrigement (they're just normal Sembo & Sluban mechas). Lego would then totally be stealing their parts.

Trust me that there would be zero structural/stress problem with inverter plates. Perhaps metrics problems, but those are already plaguing the entire brackets system. IMHO the reason LEGO might have had not to do them in the past, was perhaps that it made people feel clever to do stud inversion. And indeed it *was* fun and "part of the game" to find ways to do stud inversion. But we've moved beyond that now, no one's a genius anymore because he made a clever stud inversion. Instead, it has become an annoying thing to do with pure LEGO (and I've moved on). The problem is, if LEGO comes up with such plates NOW, it will be too little, too late. Not only they will be seen as the ones who copy, but also purists are gonna say that it "betrays the soul of LEGO, it's not LEGO anymore". So do they even have anything to win? There's definitely things that we're never ever gonna get as LEGO for technical & safety reasons, but that's only a small part of other brand's interesting ones, and mostly the tiny ones. We're of course never gonna get those stud rings, let alone those STUDS (yes I do mean STUDS, standalone STUDS with a thin bar attached to them, in order to extend STUD HOLES). We're never gonna get 2L bars and the closest thing we got is that one with a ring in the middle. We'll never get proper candlesticks as LEGO DELIBERATELY made then slightly thicker than a stud, while other brands made it another one of the most powerful parts. All this because of kids who'd cry if they lose a LEGO inside another and even for daddy there would be no way to separate them. But that's the philosophy they chose.

Actually, NOT having injection marks would be a sign that it's "fake". I sometimes buy other brands for that specific reason, in case I need studs exposed. For ex, the part I DON'T want as original LEGO, is the good old ingot. LEGO itself has been caught erasing the ingot's injection mark on marketing images (or perhaps they just use offbrand ones lol), because they're just ugly. Well, those parts do exist without marks. Most of the time other brands also have such marks, but not at the same spots. So depending on the faces that are visible, they're still useful. Also, there's no such thing as "fake LEGO" with LEGO labels on studs. Unless I'm mistaken, that has never been produced (there would be no point, it's hardly a luxury item worth the troubles). If it says LEGO then it's LEGO.

At this scale (but not above!) ball joints are totally ok (well, I've done it), the key is high-friction extenders. The problem is more on the lower leg sections, those have to be thin, angled, but solid. Quite tricky. It's never gonna be strong like a LEGO set, but it can definitely hold "for the picture".

A couple of years ago I went from being a purist (NOT because I love the LEGO brand, and in fact no one should "love" a brand, large brands are never your friends - but because for me limiting myself to LEGO was part of "the rules of MOCing"), to including everything that's "in-system" (and some brands are more "in-system" than LEGO itself, preserving parts that LEGO ditched decades ago). So for some time I had been wondering about Rebrickable's (I have some MOCs there) view on third-party elements (especially when some of them are actually easier to get than genuine LEGO), assuming that they would "probably" not like it. Well I guess it's clear now. On one hand, if that's a design choice, if that's truly what the creator has always had in mind: why not, it's up to him. ON THE OTHER HAND, I have doubts about the real motives behind such decisions. See, more than often these side companies are created purely in hope to one day be acquired by a larger one. And decisions like this seem to align with "getting along with LEGO" in hope to be possibly bought later. But these decisions are never in OUR favor. It totally made sense for Bricklink to be acquired by LEGO, but the LEGO group didn't buy BL in OUR interest. What did they do first? Remove all third-party LEGO (which were only the chromed parts). IMHO the main reason LEGO bought BL is that BL could have become (even through a switch or under another URL) a LEGO+other brands marketplace, and LEGO's best option to prevent that was to just buy it. (that still leaves Brickowl though, which I'd totally switch to if they opened to all brands) I haven't done much MOC instructions lately because I'm lazy, however (like most MOCers I assume) I'm regularly approached by companies who do pretty much the same thing as Rebrickable under one form or another, or wanna produce full kits, but aren't limited to the brand, or are sometimes purely based on other brands (usually GoBricks). So there are always options... (now LEGO has two hands, one full of bills and the other holding a hammer. If they don't fight by acquisition they fight through lawsuits) What pisses me off is that very recently I just can't get any non-LEGO through Aliexpress anymore. Sluban and Sembo sets are pretty much always seized by customs for "IP infrigement" now for me (in Europe). I thought that LEGO only wanted to protect their minifigs, and thus I never buy sets with minifigs, or in the worst case I ask the seller to remove them. But it doesn't even seem to matter anymore now! It has become very hard for me to get those unique, brand-specific parts now (except the ones sold in bulk on Ali, I haven't had problems with those -so far-, but it's probably not gonna last). (what sucks even more is that I'm also a large LEGO buyer and that I've spent 5, if not 6-digit numbers on their stuff, only to be slapped in the face when I'm also interested in the competition) Edit: I'm surprised I haven't received such a warning from Rebrickable, as my "best seller" there is pretty much displaying non-LEGO parts (those wedge tiles that are now everywhere except in LEGO sets) in your face lol.

Yeah I forgot those silly "x50" for something you only need one of, like a minifig head... "Try running a store" is the worst thing to say and a sign that maybe BL is doomed to end, or go back to what it used to be: a way for parents to teach kids about running a small business and make pocket money (I'm really surprised when I see large stores showing that a BL store can really be a genuine business). But that's not gonna convince the customer, unless you're the only way to get something he really wants, and I can only think of minifigs or retired sets (which may really be what BL is gonna end up being, normal parts being thrown away because they take too much time for too little). Paypal fees btw, that's something you self-inflicted. When I started using BL, bank transfers were the norm. It should even be easier nowadays with free immediate bank transfers in many places. Yet most shops are Paypal first now. Or is it LEGO that pushed it forward when they acquired BL? I see you're in the UK btw. I'm sure that's also a factor that affected you. I know I was ordering in the UK once in a while, but completely stopped after the brexit. Also, the "you then spend a 2-3 hours picking to make 3-4 Euros/dollars/pounds", assuming you're not selling used parts (which is completely different logistics), you're wasting most of your time sorting something that was definitely not packaged to be in the first place. It's all wasted time & money unpacking and then manually sorting and re-packing. And of course it would be pointless for LEGO to streamline this, since they're already selling parts themselves, and BL is the reason why a toys store will always be able to sell LEGO, which has value and I can't imagine LEGO willing to get rid of that.

It's easy to avoid overexpensive BL shops, however IMHO BL gave too much power to sellers and it's not always easy to spot the annoying ones at a first glance. I'm talking about all those annoying rules like "average lot value" (min buy is ok), "I charge X if the average lot value is less than Y", "I add X for packaging", "I charge X for shipping" and it ends up being different on the cart. Also the fact that a used part and a new part being 2 different parts in the system, offer & demand works independantly for them and it's not uncommon at all to find a used part more expensive than a used one within the same shop. But I also understand that BL is full of shops ran by dads and their kids, so it may just be a hobby for many so the sellers need options as well. I buy a lot less nowadays though, because shipping prices in Europe kinda killed the game. No shop has everything, you usually have to split what you need into multiple small orders for which the shipping can be like 50% of the price. And these days we kinda have other options.

Loving the latest update. Anyone knows which set the new 7674 bracket is from? Can't find anything about it online

Funny, I much prefer semi/fully hollow studs, visually. I sometimes have them on purpose in my MOCs, while I (try to) never expose studs with logos. Why? Because from distance, the Lego (or any) logo looks like dirt. I treat them the same as mould marks (and they often have one on top of the logo, to make things worse). It's detail that's not at the same scale as the model you're making, looks bad IMHO. But open studs, or even plain studs without logo & mould mark, I like them visually.

Also, side notches (well, for 1 by X parts) > tubes. IMHO Lego should ditch the tubes entirely.

Same for me & pretty much every MOCer (I've even found my stuff on Amazon), but... that's exactly why it's the right thing to do to credit the inspiration & let's agree that it's more than inspiration when the mechamism seems to be the same [same rope design, same linkage underneath, same visible gears, same windshield, all at the same place]. In fact, I think it would have made an even better model if you hadn't copied the stabilisation of the extremity of the fins. That's the one thing that doesn't look too great on the Stodeer one, and it doesn't look natural either (I mean they don't seem to swim like that). And I'm all for not bothering to credit sources when they're already very obvious to everyone, but the Stodeer model is obscure enough (judging from the first comments).

I don't like Musk at all and this is only one of the stupid things he has piled up, however.. the keyword (from the article) here is conspiracy. Conspiracies between brands/companies is a real thing and it's generally illegal. But most of the time it's companies doing the same thing that conspire to keep prices high & avoid competition, which is bad for the consumer. I don't see the point of such a conspiracy here, nor how it'd be bad for the consumer.

Bad vibe to point out that the original isn't being credited, or not to credit it in the first place? It's a feat in the first place to do it in Lego, so I don't see the point of not crediting the source. Unless I'm mistaken and Stodeer's one isn't the source - correct me if I'm wrong.

It's cool & all (to see it working in Lego) but no link with the Stodeer one? https://stodeer.com/products/innovative-mechanical-metal-manta-ray-model-perfect-for-decorations-and-gifts-steampunk-style-advanced-3d-metal-devil-fish-puzzle-kit-sd-01

Hello, I've done major changes since then, so it's now a 5.0 for which I'll have to take pictures one day. But as you know I went full third-party parts for my AT-ST, so I won't be able to do instructions (but maybe pictures of a blown-up version) anymore. The base however is all proper Lego (or perhaps with a couple of easy-to-find recolors), so yes I should be making instructions for that, but I'm lazy :( A quick pic of the "new" one. The angle of the "jaw" changed from 2x3 to 2x2 slopes (more accurate) and a lot has changed inside.

There are 2 stands in my instructions, but the latest version doesn't have instructions, and thus the "rock" stand isn't there either. I've moved away from pure Lego, and I don't think that Rebrickable would welcome instructions that absolutely require non-Lego parts now (not counting that it's harder to build instructions when non-Lego parts aren't available in virtual). I've changed the design again btw, I still need to take new pictures. However the rock isn't using any non-Lego mould, only one or two recolors I believe, and it's compatible with all versions, so maybe I should build instructions for it alone.

"Clone" brands are so advanced by now anyway, what can Lego still do that won't be a "copy"? It would be everyone's (and especially Lego's, and our) best interest to stop wanting to protect/patent "new" parts and instead share what's out there. Stud inverters, inverted clips, all kinds of chainable slopes, curves and wedges, wedge tiles, 3x4 plates, 1x10 tiles.. anything you can dream of does exist (and is sometimes really hard to find because there's no Bricklink for clones [probably the real reason why Lego bought it btw]), and if people are too snobs about the Lego brand, and if Lego is too proud and protective of its brand, we're never gonna see those pop up as genuine Lego. Lego generally tries to make their own version of what already exists out there. Like, stud+bar already existed, but Lego's is more "in system". 2/3 bracket brick was already widely available, Lego made theirs rounded (but in general, brackets are A LOT more powerful in clone systems). And also the infamous 1x5 plate that Lego tried to patent, that other brands had for years. Of course there are parts that Lego would never do for "safety" reasons. Like, THE most useful "Lego" part that cannot and will never be genuine Lego, because not every existing part has stud blockers, and you can definitely lose these inside bricks:

Loving the update! However, the LDD is now seeing a collision between these 2 and is removing them when loading. Here shown in dev mode: I've checked the grille part and it doesn't seem to have been edited recently, weird. The file (for 2412) only has one collision box (which could be the issue, because of the tile's lip). Sadly I didn't make a backup first, so I can't say if the previous one had a different collision. But the file being from 2020, I assume there's no need for me to check an older update. Does this ring any bell?

I have both sold & free MOC instructions (on Rebrickable). I wouldn't advise anyone to bother with this for other reasons that enjoyment, because it is pocket money, never expect it to fund your time & money investment, or even come close. At best expect it to pay for some parts. Do it for fun and just that. It definitely IS fun - until it's not. Especially making proper instructions, very time consuming, while sometimes just 5 people will look at them. As long as it's fun, it's fine. I once suggested a quick & easy option to sell for charities, on Rebrickable. It's still not available but IMHO it would be nice to have. As long as it's not a real business and just pocket money, it'd better go to charities IMHO. & for those who want numbers to know what to expect: my best-selling MOC has sold 430x, which I believe is A LOT to expect from Rebrickable. Most of my other MOCs sold from 3x [lol] to 10x. As for the free ones I can't know - no stats (I'd expect them to be more popular though). Also, when you release instructions, expect your stuff to end up on AliExpress, it just WILL (and will sell more there than you ever will).

the roof looks like 1 part but it's probably the blur that makes lines disappear. Looks like a simple 4x6 plate with a row of plates on top for double thickness, to me

Has anyone (in Europe & possibly other places) been confiscated orders from China recently? I buy a lot of LEGO, and sometimes other brands. We all know that LEGO works along with customs in order to block counterfeit, and that's legitimate since Ali is filled with them. But recently I've been seized (with no way of appeal, because.. it's Cainiao) sets from legit brands, that are 100% original & aren't copies of LEGO sets, that don't contain minifigs, and that have legit licenses. Won't name the brand because I suppose we can't here, but they have a valid SpongeBob license (which LEGO doesn't even own anymore!) and it's a brick-based character set. There is zero reason for it to be confiscated, but it was, and I strongly suspect that LEGO is behind this in some way, and that since recently "the customs" are just confiscating whatever remotely looks like LEGO. But I've only been confiscated my last 2 orders so I don't know... Also the other one was a legit brand, an original set, but it was a brick-built vehicle from Dragon Ball for which they don't have a license (they don't mention Dragon Ball), so I thought that it was the reason it was labelled as counterfeit. Meanwhile Ali keeps selling my MOCs (and I'm not whining about it, all MOCers are in the same boat), but *I* can't even buy legit sets from there anymore. I don't know who to be pissed at here, LEGO or Cainiao. I'd say Cainiao (which belongs to Ali, that has sold the items in the first place) because I would easily appeal this (like the law normally allows us), only they are just unreachable.

The tips don't even fit Lego metrics btw, do they? I'm nearly sure they just outsourced normal shoelaces.

For me it's not about the brand it's about the system (that Lego didn't invent anyway). A third-party recolor of a Lego part, or a part that could/should have been Lego but just isn't/isn't yet, to me is more "Lego" than a shoelace just because a Lego set happens to have a shoelace in it.